Patient Selection and Outcomes of Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Performed with Monitored Anesthesia Care Versus General Anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) versus general anesthesia (GA) for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) and to describe a selection process for the administration of MAC.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent TF-TAVR under MAC or GA.

SETTING

Department of Cardiac Anesthesia, Albany Medical Center, a tertiary university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients selected for TF-TAVR.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were divided into those who underwent MAC and those who underwent GA.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The study comprised 104 consecutive patients (55% male, mean age 83 years) who underwent TF-TAVR under MAC (n = 60) or GA (n = 37) from 2014 to 2015. Seven patients were converted from MAC to GA and were omitted from analysis. There was no statistically significant difference between 30-day mortality and complications between the 2 groups. The MAC group had a significantly shorter median intensive care unit length of stay (48 h v 74 h, p = 0.0002). The MAC group also demonstrated reduced procedural time (45.5 min v 62 min, p = 0.003); operating room time (111 min v 153 min, p = <0.001); and fluoroscopy time (650 s v 690 s, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient selection for TF-TAVR with MAC can be formalized and implemented successfully. MAC allows for the minimizing of patient exposure to unnecessary interventions and improving resource utilization in suitable TAVR patients. Selection requires a multidisciplinary clinical decision-making process. MAC demonstrates good outcomes compared with GA, yet it is important to have a cardiac anesthesiologist present in the event of emergency conversion to GA.